What would Japan have done if Malaya well defended?

SaparotRob · May 1, 2021

wlewisiii said:
Reading through this, I think that the Japanese response to a more heavily defended Malaya would have been that it would be harder fought and cost more but the oil was still absolutely necessary. Without it, they're nothing.

December 41:
1) Continue with the attack at Pearl Harbor to minimize the risk of US Naval intervention
2) Attack the air fields on the PI to minimize the risk of US air intervention.
3) Roll all the forces that would have been used to invade the PI into the invasion of Malaya

Feb 42:
4) Use a naval strike force of carriers and battleships to draw out the British naval forces to the slaughter.

May 42:
5) After the fall of Malaya, try to sue for peace with the US. If it fails (probably due to psych of Pearl Harbor) invade PI

July ~ September 42:
6) Use that to try to bait a set piece naval battle with the US such as they always planned for to crush the US Pacific fleet.

The important thing to remember is that the Japanese need the US & Britain out of the picture by late 42 so they can consolidate their gains. If the US codebreakers are as successful in this timeline as in the prime, then 6) could turn into a "Midway" scenario and the long but inevitable defeat of the IJN begins because, just like Germany in Europe, they don't have the resources to win.

I think that no matter how it plays out, the end is still a defeat for the Axis, it just takes longer - perhaps until 1948 - and costs many more lives but the resources of the western hemisphere would still be overwhelming.

I don't know if not attacking the Philippines was an option. If Japan goes forward with the attack on Pearl Harbor and not take the PI, it would take considerable air and naval assets to prevent its reinforcement. The USN carriers weren't caught at Pearl. Long ranging Allied bombers and flying boats would have to be interdicted from leaving or arriving at the PI. My best what-if for Japan is not to attack the U.S. at all. I personally think that unless U.S. soil was attacked, the isolationist faction would have kept the America out of the war. I've seen documentaries that asked "Why did you attack?" The answer was "We thought you wouldn't fight." I know that statement is completely anecdotal and unverifiable but it seems to ring true.
Yes, the militarists who came up with the plans didn't really think it through.
More like "scream and leap".

Admiral Beez · May 1, 2021

ClayO said:
One more way that Japan would have been better off not to have started the war at all.

True, but they're stuck. The IJA has gone rogue in China, first ignoring and then replacing the government. The country's military spending is now over 40% of GDP, and food and materials are running out. They're painted into a corner and getting desperate, with no facing saving way out. It's too bad that China didn't kick their ass in 1937-38 and thus put the IJA in their place at home.

But if Japan could find a honourable exit from China, an end to US and British sanctions, and reduced military spending to about 10% (Britain never exceed 5% pre-war) it would have been interesting to see the smaller, and presumably sharpened Kido Butai, IJNAS and IJAF.

I'd expect the small and slow carriers Hosho and Ryujo to be mothballed and eventually scrapped, and the two Junyo class not to be converted to carriers, and the six Unryu class fleet aircraft carriers canceled in place of additional Taiho armoured fleet carriers, with the first two replacing a retiring Kaga and Akagi. Shinano is canceled, the two Yamatos complete as battleships. On aircraft, A5M and Ki-27 are retired.

Diplomatically, as a buffer to the US and USSR, Japan needs to enter the war close to Britain. And if they play their cards right, Japan can hold onto Korea and maybe Manchuria into the 1950s and beyond.

Thumpalumpacus · May 1, 2021

Had Japan not started the war with America, I doubt the Taihos would have been built until 1948 or 1950. Anther couple of Hiryus/Unryus to round the fleet carrier count out to eight -- they seemed to like that number in planning (8/8 plan in the 20s for instance). Taiho was heavily influenced by British design qualia, but pretty expensive to build even for a carrier. And Japan's economy was already strained by its defense outlays.

Admiral Beez · May 2, 2021

Thumpalumpacus said:
Had Japan not started the war with America, I doubt the Taihos would have been built until 1948 or 1950. Anther couple of Hiryus/Unryus to round the fleet carrier count out to eight -- they seemed to like that number in planning (8/8 plan in the 20s for instance). Taiho was heavily influenced by British design qualia, but pretty expensive to build even for a carrier. And Japan's economy was already strained by its defense outlays.

By 1950 China will be looking to avenge Japan's attack and will try to take Manchuria. Meanwhile with no Pacific War, India and Burma are likely still British, FIC still French and DEI still Dutch. It'd be a whole different world in the PTO. If China's gone Communist and is aggressive to Manchuria, Korea and likely Hong Kong and the US, British, French and Italian holdings in Shanghai and Nanking we may see everyone teaming up with Japan like during the Boxer Rebellion.

The Wallies might get to see the Japanese fleet carriers or even IJNS Yamato up close. Now that would be something.

Thumpalumpacus · May 2, 2021

Admiral Beez said:
By 1950 China will be looking to avenge Japan's attack and will try to take Manchuria. Meanwhile with no Pacific War, India and Burma are likely still British, FIC still French and DEI still Dutch. It'd be a whole different world in the PTO. If China's gone Communist and is aggressive to Manchuria, Korea and likely Hong Kong and the US, British, French and Italian holdings in Shanghai and Nanking we may see everyone teaming up with Japan like during the Boxer Rebellion.

The Wallies might get to see the Japanese fleet carriers or even IJNS Yamato up close. Now that would be something.

Entirely possible. I do think that without PTO the American carriers would probably lag as well. Can you see a Midway being built without wartime pressures?

In short, full-on war speeds up military advances, not just with carriers, but also the planes they carry, and also other branches of arms. Jets would have come along, so too nuclear reactors or heavy tanks. But when people are fighting and dying at the other end of the line, the evolutionary process is speeded-up, I think. In biology it's called "selection pressure". I think the evolution of warfighting tools works on that as well.

A "police action" such as you're saying could well see early-40s production having a stage for demonstration, but without the do-or-die of 1943, I'm not sure the advances would have been pursued so definitely. The Americans got as close as they needed to be to the Yamato with essentially 1941 tech.

What would Japan have done if Malaya well defended?

More options

SaparotRob

Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII

Admiral Beez

Major

Thumpalumpacus

Major

Admiral Beez

Major

Thumpalumpacus

Major

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads